to stream or not to stream?

before christmas, one our neighbors had a tree cutter and an excavator in his backyard excavating a stream/ditch. this ditch he dug was in an area indicated as a blue line stream on the USGS topo (which means... it is subject to buffer rules intended to keep pollution such as sediment OUT of our streams and rivers). the folks that dug the ditch cut down numerous trees and did not replant any disturbed areas. which means that water flows more free and faster down the ditch (thus moving more sediment into the tar river basin).


as the good environmental steward i am, i asked my favorite buffer specialist (chris) about what i should do. although our S/D is outside of his regional (he works in washington), he pulled maps and told me that it appeared it MAY be a buffer violation, to contact the raleigh office and have their person take a look at it.

a month has passed, i've seen the neighbor burning stumps in his back yard (after the burn ban was lifted of coarse), but other than that, we haven't seen or heard anything about the incident.

today we got this email from this neighbor:

To all of our Neighbors in [S/D],

We would like to let everyone know that our recent project to remove standing water from behind our house has been approved by the North Carolina Department of Water Quality. This project was undertaken after extensive research to insure that all EPA and other requirements were met. In addition, geological maps were studied, long term local residents were consulted and several excavating contractors reviewed the project.

What disturbs us is whoever had concerns about what we had done, didn’t think it was important to ask us, what and why. Instead, someone decided that the best thing to do was “drop a dime” and see what would happen. Where we come from, we expect that when someone has a problem or concern, that person will simply come up to us, face to face, and ask what’s going on.

So there is no confusion about this project, several years ago a stream ran though the back of our property. During a major ice storm, many trees fell down and this blocked the natural flow of water downstream. Whenever it rained, water would pool and become stagnant, which led to mosquitoes, snakes and other creatures. For the good of the community, at considerable expense, it was decided to fix this problem.

In the future, if you have any questions please feel free to stop and ask.

comments about his email:

1. uh, the DWQ personnel that investigated this incident stated that she could not find a stream channel up or down stream of the excavation site. which means this stream would be "exempt" from the buffer rules. therefore, DWQ would not need to "approve" it as is stated in the letter. plus, if they had exempted (approved) it before he did it, then they wouldn't have needed to go to the site and investigate. right? (this indicates to me that he is pulling shit out of his ass to "save face" as my husband put it.)

2. what in the world does the EPA have to do with it? unless this is federal land (which it is not), then they really don't do anything with buffers. so, i wonder why and or who approved anything with EPA! (again, "saving face.")

3. here is my biggest peeve. it is not the "department of water quality" it is the DIVISION of water quality. department of environment and natural resourses. idiot.

4. "geological maps"? huh? what does the geology matter? how about TOPOGRAPHIC maps!

5. "long term local residents were consulted" as opposed to short term local residents? who are those folks? people that have been here for a while? well before this S/D was a S/D, this was a tree farm. did the trees talk?

6. and "several years ago a stream ran though the back of our property" uh, so now he's admitting it WAS a stream (although it isn't now). uh, if it WAS a stream, the the rules DID apply, and you'd think he would have gotten that "exemption" before he did the work!

7. "Whenever it rained, water would pool and become stagnant, which led to mosquitoes, snakes and other creatures" as chris said in response: "if it's a stream, wasn't it still flowing, even if there was a ponded portion? Isn't there a Newtonian law about inputs equaling outputs that would apply?"

8. lastly, just to clear up why maybe i didn't talk to him about it, he is like the most UNAPPROACHABLE person in this neighborhood. you may can tell that from his email, but maybe not. he's from "the north" and has his "almighty" personality to go along with it. i haven't really a problem with him, just his attitude. (attitude i saw at several of the HOA meetings previously blogged about by my husband.)

anyone else have any comments???